Post-theistic Christianity "Other view"

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

Yeah, you do understand! See, there are these two well defined camps: I'm not sure "literalist" is the right word, but maybe you know what I mean, and what I would call "debunkers". I think that both sides are making the mistake of trying to force rationality, or logical "systems" onto the mystical. The literalists continually have to come up with special theories for how Noah could have gotten all those animals into the ark and where all the water went after, or how the sun really, literally could have stood still, or why Matthew and Luke give Jesus two different grandpas. The debunkers really make the same mistake in that all they see is what they're looking for: inconsistencies and impossibilities.

The problem for me is that when I try to write what I'm thinking I have a hard time finding a language that doesn't wind up sounding like one or the other faction. But I'm not, I'm not, I'm not a detractor--even if I sound like one.

Chris

Well, we are in agreement on this point. And about golf.

luna

[Dor]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

I know that virgins don't conceive, people don't die and then come back to life, the sun can't stand still, mental illness doesn't come from evil spirits. I'm pretty sure that the gospels don't present history, and I know the OT doesn't either. I know that we are evolving as a species rather than devolving from some edenic state. Chris

No everyday virgins dont conceive, People dont die and then come back to life(believe thats only happened 2 times), the sun can't stand still(not without help), so what you are actually saying is miracles cant happen and God is limited in what he can or cant do.

If the gospels or NT or OT are historical we can agree to disagree.

Are we evolving as a species rather than devolving from some edenic state? Please show me how this is a better world we live in now days. Please any proof you can give me of that.

[China Cat Sunflower]

Hey, I shot 89 last Sunday while you were dozing in church!

Chris

[Dor]

I have so much to say to this post but it is just to late Im gonna get a good start in the morning...when Ive had time to process this.

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by Dor

No everyday virgins dont conceive, People dont die and then come back to life(believe thats only happened 2 times), the sun can't stand still(not without help), so what you are actually saying is miracles cant happen and God is limited in what he can or cant do.

If the gospels or NT or OT are historical we can agree to disagree.

Are we evolving as a species rather than devolving from some edenic state? Please show me how this is a better world we live in now days. Please any proof you can give me of that.

A better world compared to what historical period?

Chris

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Dor

Please show me how this is a better world we live in now days. Please any proof you can give me of that.

hey Dor
does intellectual suicide qualify?

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

I fail to see the point. Why would not "miracles" and "super-natural" occurances happen? Because somebody with an over-educated mind and little else to contribute says these things are illogical?

Can't speak for anybody else, but I have seen miracles in my own life, that could not be explained by any rational process. I have seen many times similar occurances in other people's lives. So now, I am to disbelieve in miracles, not because of evidence, but because it is irrational?

It took a Pagan friend of mine to point out, that to a Creator of (a) universe(s), a virgin pregnancy and birth is child's play. Why would He have trouble making the sun apparently stand still? Why would He have any problem whatsoever doing whatever He deigns to do? Including manipulating formal religious and political structures?

Are we, miserable little pukes that we all are, the potter, or the clay? Do we make God in our own image, or do we strive to understand Him as He is?

I'm afraid that what I see so far is just another fragmentation excuse to further divide the institution of Christianity. No matter what we think, or feel, or pretend, or imagine; God is God. The question is, do we see Him for what He really is, or do we continue to paint Him as we desire Him to be? Do we invent a god in our own image to make "him" more palatable and less obsolete? My vote is no, but then, I know I do not speak for everybody.

this is real good Juan. if they cant explain it or give a scientific explanation then God cannot do it & it never happened. Jesus confirmed so many things that happened in the jewish scriptures from Abel this way, as he stood between God & man. People dont see because they lack faith but i too do not speak for everyone & i dont need to.

these people cried out to Jesus for deliverance...if i can just touch the hem of his garment i know i will be made whole, there was no medicine for leprosy...the same man who said it shall be as it was in the days of Noah, the same man who said he will tell some to depart from me, i never knew you. He gave us warning signs right along with his love that we would not be led astray.

a man reveals what he thinks & what is in his heart by what he speaks

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

Hi Faithfulservant,

Since Q and Juan don't seem to be around at the moment, I'll just put in a word. This thread is controversial, yet it also seems to belong more to the Christianity forum (so far) than any other place. I think the idea of stickying it is to denote it's somewhat special status in this respect, i.e., it explores issues that are not mainstream Christianity. I may not be completely correct in this, but that is my understanding.

lunamoth

It gives those that wish to discuss the issues concerning non mainstream Christian thought a chance to do so.

After all, regardless of our take on how Christianity should be "run", we are One in the Spirit, and One in the Lord...

This isn't the first time a particular thread has been stickied in the forum for a little while, and it won't be the last.

It has been so far, and extremely fine learning experience for many of us (an eye opener).

v/r

Q

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Bandit

...
a man reveals what he thinks & what is in his heart by what he speaks

Then what we have here on this thread is a lot of people who want to express what they think and feel, without being chastised, or ridiculed or scoffed at, for it.

I dare say, even a "leper" has a voice that should be earnestly paid attention to...

v/r

Q

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Then what we have here on this thread is a lot of people who want to express what they think and feel, without being chastised, or ridiculed or scoffed at, for it.

I dare say, even a "leper" has a voice that should be earnestly paid attention to...

v/r

Q

so allow this leper to do the same instead of being ridiculed & put down for every word he speaks

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Bandit

so allow this leper to do the same instead of being ridiculed & put down for every word he speaks

You mis-understood...I'm the leper...so are these people who express views contrary to main stream views of Christ.

You're clean.

v/r

Q

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by YNOT

I wish to throw out the cultural trappings because I see them as irrelevant to the core of Jesus' message. These supernatural ideas were added on by bishops and other church leaders throughout Christianity's history. They were voted on by committee in the First and Second Councils of Nicea (325 A.D. and later in 787) along with the idea of Jesus being a deity. Therefore, they are an unnecessary (IMV) add-on for me and many others living in this postmodern world. It's kindof like putting legs on a snake. I don't subscribe to New Age philosophy or Esoteric Christianity either. These ideas, to me, are just substituting mysticism in the place of supernaturalism. The Gnostics too were just as capable of creating elaborate cosmologies that have little to do with spirituality....all of these ideas are, to me, just epicycles on top of epicycles.

If I have to believe in what's found in the Nicene Creed in order to be a Christian, then I guess I'm not a Christian. (This last sentence wasn't directed to you or to anyone else) I care about labels even less though. We have to remember that Jesus wasn't a Christian either. He was, IMV, simply a God-presence that inspired many of the people who were lucky enough to witness his teachings and actions. So was the Buddha. This really is enough for me. These cultural trappings really are part and parcel of the INSTITUTIONS that have gone on to make-up today's Christian faith. I just like to think that if Jesus were here today, he would shrug his shoulders in ambivalence if these add-ons were to all disappear.

Respectfully yours,
Tony

hi Tony,
i dont think these things are add ons for the most part. what i see is some people who were trying to hold something together with the best of their understanding for the time. in some obscure way, i feel it was necessary.
i do not agree with Nicene ONLY for several reasons. No, Nicene has no right to destroy writings & what others believe neither do they have the right to condem others who see it differently. i also dont think it is right to use dogma & creeds by the way of force & this is what happened. in that respect we see things the same. if you take the POV that it is not valid or try to disassemble someone, then there is a problem. in it's own gathering this is also what Nicene Only does.
while i do not agree with that whole creed, i dont think it is that far off base.
i also consider what Jesus taught about using vain repititions & is another reason why i do not do that.
but this is important for gnostics & arians & whoever to realize they cant use force either by trying to take away something that someone else holds dear. what happens is, we end up setting our own cultural trappings & in some ways i think this is inevitable.
some Christians thought they could take away our bibles to substitute hierarchy & have it in only one language...well too bad, we will have it in all languages for everyone to study who wants to study regardless of who may have tampered with it along the way.

if people want to belong to institutions then they should be allowed to if they are more comfortable with that & on the other end, myself as an independant & the smallest of them all, i appreciate the same respect. i am finding the people who choose this walk alone with Jesus & who decide to let go of the ugly past, while also allowing for fellowship to be more in tune & that is how i wish it could be. Path of One, Juan, Seattlegal & some others here are awesome examples of this & i admire them for their independance, their faith & the courage to seek things out on their own.
i think it is possible for people to walk together who have disagreements, by discussing something different.

i dont think the fight for the title Christian is what Jesus is looking for.
you dont have to agree with me & i do not expect anyone here to agree, but this is what i see in a nutshell. now i will be off to move nine yards of mulch & get some fresh spring air.

peace & love in Jesus

[Dor]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

It gives those that wish to discuss the issues concerning non mainstream Christian thought a chance to do so.

After all, regardless of our take on how Christianity should be "run", we are One in the Spirit, and One in the Lord...

This isn't the first time a particular thread has been stickied in the forum for a little while, and it won't be the last.

It has been so far, and extremely fine learning experience for many of us (an eye opener).

v/r

Q

Well everyone it seems has a place on these forums to post there thoughts and believes just seems the "mainstream"'s place is shrinking daily...but just cause you name your dog "cat" doesnt make it a cat....just cause you want to call your self christian after taking Christ out of it leaves you with a ian not what you want to be called.....calling Sponge and anything he writes Christian....is like calling a flame cold it just doesnt work

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Faithfulservant!

Good to see you around!

Could someone try explaining to me whats going on? Thanks

In light of what has gone on in the past, Q and I thought it best to specially mark this thread for the benefit of those with "mainstream" Christian views to note that the discussion was decidedly non-mainstream.

This is a bit of an experiment, to see if the two camps can co-exist peacefully. So far, so good in my estimation, but time will tell. By marking the thread in the manner we did, it allows our mainstream contributors a little notice that they may wish to avoid it if it seems too challenging or appears somehow threatening. We do not wish to offend anyone, least of all those who have taken the time to build this portion of the forum. At least, that is how I see this right now.

Hope this helps!

[Dor]

Originally Posted by YNOT

I wish to throw out the cultural trappings because I see them as irrelevant to the core of Jesus' message. These supernatural ideas were added on by bishops and other church leaders throughout Christianity's history. They were voted on by committee in the First and Second Councils of Nicea (325 A.D. and later in 787) along with the idea of Jesus being a deity. Respectfully yours,
Tony

I just have to ask where you get your information about Jesus being voted on as a deity at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.

You ever here of..
Polycarp (70-155 A.D.)
Justin Martyr(100?-165?)
Ignatius of Antioch(died A.D. 98/117)
Ireanus(115-190)
Tertullian(160-215)
Origen(185-254)
Gospels
Matthew(50-70)
Mark(55-70)
Luke(before AD 62)
Acts(around AD 63)
John(80-90)

All well before the Council of Nicea and 325.